| Title |
Whole-body MRI versus 18F-FDG PET/CT for pretherapeutic assessment and staging of lymphoma: a meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
OncoTargets and therapy, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ott.s148189 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Danyang Wang, Yanlei Huo, Suyun Chen, Hui Wang, Yingli Ding, Xiaochun Zhu, Chao Ma |
| Abstract |
18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) is the reference standard in staging of 18F-FDG-avid lymphomas; however, there is no recommended functional imaging modality for indolent lymphomas. Therefore, we aimed to compare the performance of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) with that of 18F-FDG PET/CT for lesion detection and initial staging in patients with aggressive or indolent lymphoma. We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases for studies that compared WB-MRI with 18F-FDG PET/CT for lymphoma staging or lesion detection. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using version 2 of the "Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies" tool. The pooled staging accuracy (μ) of WB-MRI and 18F-FDG PET/CT for initial staging and for assessing possible heterogeneity (χ2) across studies were calculated using commercially available software. Eight studies comprising 338 patients were included. In terms of staging, the meta-analytic staging accuracies of WB-MRI and 18F-FDG PET/CT for Hodgkin lymphoma and aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) were 98% (95% CI, 94%-100%) and 98% (95% CI, 94%-100%), respectively. The pooled staging accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT dropped to 87% (95% CI, 72%-97%) for staging in patients with indolent lymphoma, whereas that of WB-MRI remained 96% (95% CI, 91%-100%). Subgroup analysis indicated an even lower staging accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT for staging of less FDG-avid indolent NHLs (60%; 95% CI, 23%-92%), in contrast to the superior performance of WB-MRI (98%; 95% CI, 88%-100%). WB-MRI is a promising radiation-free imaging technique that may serve as a viable alternative to 18F-FDG PET/CT for staging of 18FDG-avid lymphomas, where 18F-FDG PET/CT remains the standard of care. Additionally, WB-MRI seems a less histology-dependent functional imaging test than 18F-FDG PET/CT and may be the imaging test of choice for staging of indolent NHLs with low 18F-FDG avidity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 40% |
| United States | 2 | 40% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
| Researcher | 3 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 19% |
| Unknown | 11 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 42% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 14 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 October 2022.
All research outputs
#6,278,831
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#306
of 3,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,535
of 342,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#6
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,016 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,877 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.